Korea Land Trust Co., Ltd. (Law Firm Jeong, Attorneys Cho Jae-chul et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Head of Busan District Tax Office

January 14, 2010

Daejeon District Court Decision 2009Guhap1077 Decided September 30, 2009

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

1. Purport of claim

A. The primary purport of the claim is to confirm that the attachment disposition against the plaintiff on October 7, 2008 by the defendant as to the deposit claim in the attached list is null and void.

B. Preliminary claim: Revocation of the above attachment disposition.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and all the plaintiff's main and conjunctive claims are dismissed.

1. The reasons for this judgment are as follows: (a) the reasons for the judgment of the first instance, except for the addition of the following:

(1) The following shall be added between pages 3, 17 and 18:

According to this, the defendant issued a collection disposition under the National Tax Collection Act only against the non-party company, the truster, and accordingly issued a seizure disposition of this case. However, on the other hand, the plaintiff did not report the value-added tax of this case, and there was no other dispute between the defendant and the plaintiff (the fact that there was no dispute).

② Part 4, Paragraph 7, “Non-existent” was added to “(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da54276, Mar. 13, 2008)”, and Section 4, Section 10 was added to “Non-Performing” (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da17424, Oct. 15, 1996) and Section 12 was added to “No. 12” (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da3925, Nov. 23, 2006).

2. If so, the judgment of the court of first instance which accepted the plaintiff's primary claim is just and the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is so dismissed as per Disposition.

Judges Cho Soo-soo (Presiding Judge) Maximum index